











































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































« j>° •»* 

,• o') % * 

y % "’V ...., 
^ -‘iSi- ^ : 





H c 


4* ^ ' 


\ **rrr** y 

♦ Pa tO^ n * * *> A , * * * 





: ^ o 4 .' 


.* «.* ^ . 

• G* 

,»•'** ^ 

V * * ***_/ - ~ a 



/ ^ *<#> • 

* /\ 

C^'4 ^ 

<> * _r4SN\ . * 

* T- 


V" v' . 

; ; 

a e *k vT*„ 

«?> u 
-flV ^ 

,0 O "a, /\ 

“ 1 ' * ' 4^ 6 «> * « „ 

/ ,*^5SW. o’ 

» Jte5t=3 TS.W/M - O ^ 

o *0 * 7 *. «■ * 4 cr 

% - v°Va^-v^v--- o 

; \t W :Sfe; \/ 

^ ^ 'vKP!** .^v ■' v ' ;, ‘ 

<v <. A 0* \ *W A 

"'"% ** .o* >«>!.;« V a> " jr ... ■*• 


• « 



* <x y O 

* 4? *%> • 



• ’ • A 

». V V .»•*• 

- ^ > • 

: W • 

e ..*>4/^ 

,* V u 

<“j. '. j‘ .&4 'o »»-".• 







* * > 




.' "* t ‘ VUI^ I '° r'%. 9,0^. 

• ’ jr h v®^‘ rsO a j, rfZtiM* „h v o v^ks^.' o’ - 
. v' v^, V A *f>* , * —% v'* 4 .A, -V ' ‘ A* A- 

^ <4 ♦i\W/)i‘’ P> 4^ ♦VKtete- ^ »• 

° Y/// wW.' ry% j -^k." * a v ^> - 

\‘^. °o £*£&&> <*’ . -o A- 0 ..., - 

„ ___• ^6* . 

<0 -A > . -; o. ■ 

' ^ * £ t''§WL/dr s "v ^ *" 

.'•-'* ^°° V '^-'\<^ V' .o' 5 ' 'V .. ,.- 

- V » - J*- V O. ^ a t«0. ^ .\ V 


*J> 


, V* 

^ °- 
0 & 




o y 



r ^ . 


* 






,4 V \ 

•’ ^ & 4 -o .... 

C -- 0^ . • " * “♦ ! a c 0 W <» 4 '<P^ 

* ’^A , C * J&7f?Z%b>*- O ■'P 

* ^ 0 X * - *o K ° 

. • Spfe=a CW * ~ 

> 5 ■%. 

...-’ .o° ‘.rr,.’ ^4 

vv 






9 # 



■ . A ^ v- v • , .'^!iP >o r=' s '* » 

* % A ... <♦. ‘T^’/ ^ *- 

* ° <N 

* '‘b 

<o *' • 

> <l. v *<* V» 

K 



^ Ta, > C" * 

o ^p > 4 41 

^ <y 



>y° V 




<3 

. / •'viSv'f * aV v\. , 

„4?, rt* • <s 2) 4 V V 1 ^ 

Cr C> *0 . » < /\ ^ * 

^o A S „.*.. " 

t - -f O # c-C^IX ^ *P 




o 

o o 

O ^ « A o r\ * 

0 * 0 

'' Pa «0 r f ^ • e 



° ^ & S< 

\ w 

^ ^ ° 

* ■ "o**» ,ry > % 

.o v t* o <& o° M 0 * <s> 

* T. v; * ag’/f/Trr. "* ^ S® 1 * c^5^v *i c 

W ■^ 1 > O *> J^W/Zy^ * A/» * cRsXWW <n -O' Vi 

* ^ fv . i&maCsK - *o 



) 0v ^ 










u r 




:< 


»« 


v° r ^ v 

Cy n 0 ^ * 7 W 7 V <*r o 

°^ •■ # a 0 ^ •»’ <y 4 > 

'* CA AT *»•*- *> V v1!CA & 

• ^ A* ®i 0 o % & ' * ' 

** 4 \ V^\. ^ a ^ *P- 0 7///W^A\\V * 

:♦ at ^ • S 2 H 5 ? * <S> ^MW* 

't\ *#77»* ^o •’<7* 7* A <f“ fjf ^ ** , o*f' ,A *\ 

*«f> r$ m v i • ^ *** <3> o*®.^ * ‘ A t i . «fc- A 

**_ •'£, (P ^L/rte^ * u o _A • 6 L c ^v% 

< 





’ W : 


° ^ v 

*- A‘ Q h '***V <0 ^ ** 

% • - 0 a° K 

V' *t7L'* <A ,<y „«• ^ 

• a . % £fef* % > •’*****• *• 

’^. •»!.' A\ -. 

o 'o.A* A <, " + ^7«* .6 

l "" °- A .‘J^** % A ‘ • ^ ’* *\> 

. - u XL-*.* **b^ 

* ^ O o 

’ * 0 ' ^ ''•’■’V'^ .. \ *°° *\% 

a~ jfto, 7 v , »Vj* o .A r v> v ,«**v c» 

*■ «J<\WA.» L,. > * cSHSk • /*• * 

vP S 




t # ^ 



V ^ °*to> - 

t* .0,^ ^ 

* .. ^ ^- 0 ^° 

> CV A' V. 


° ^° ^ ’*' 
.* ft 9 % 

» *° <0 ^ 

V **/!% C\ .0 ®V_0>r V 


A*' vJV 

r ^ o 







A . * * ’ <o 

# ojV^ 

*. ^ 0^ .‘| 
4 0 * 




* 0 % & * 

• a ^ • 

* 4? ^ 

*% ^L V ^ ^ 


« * 


> M o 






. A>*^ 

A" ^ °*‘ V ^ V ^ 4 *V' ^ ^ 

o, '«>.*’* A <. *777;* Cr ^ # «».»* A 

’-r^Ry ^ r 0 v t* ^ 

A ^ °* ^° ^ ^ °^ *®fc§!fcK® ^° ^ V J 

f °^» 4,0 -° ^° ^ "'■ , * ^ % ‘e* 0 a. 0 V 

. v ‘LLL* «v jr ♦!•»', ■>. v s t >‘‘ ; .;'» o* A . 

a^ *^^|2H <,, * ^ A ^ <v *,CSR• ^ A ♦A A. 0 


7 *y ^ 



» 1 *1 



, n 0 ‘^fL «> f'o ' 



7 ^ ^ 

*» M 0 ' ^0° ' ^ * # < •» * 

^ V A^ .V^aTo ^ .A 


V 5 


’ ** 

r 7 <** ^ 7 

•’ a g> \. '•••*^> V 0 .-. # V 4 

c 0 ' * °o ^ 7 






4 

S 41/ ^ •» 





Lj .° 



y”V • 

•% “. 

,4' • 1 ' *»'^'L ° * . ^ 

A “» . >/ >^-2-, ■» O-, A 

*p r A C * ^(il//yyh, •» ^ <N v 

- ^ 0 * "£wzZ>~- •»*-<* « 


^ * 4 A 
‘ * -V 


* Cl 

h A> v<% 

♦ A o 


-wv ^°' 7 ^- 

tv * ° •’’“ A°° '%.*•■'' <<t> ., 

• ^r. c.^ * ^C\S» A," < 

v^,=> - A\\*//Ao ^v „ 



O V 


v ‘■b. *..*?:•’ .o v t 


° ^° %, ’• 
0 




. * # 



lN ^ 


; 

,^v « 

■4 dX O 

% Sty rl*- • ^ _ 

* * f 4 > O It A * .A ^ * 

%A * * A° , , . <P a\ . - - V 

0 A h . 

* ^ O 



* “ w A. 
c\ jy 

* <§> * 
^ v : 
» <v^ 


O’ * * *_°-' ^ 


■,* ^ ^ 



A v r, 0 * Q * f\^ «*-'"« * 0 ^ c ®^« 0 ♦ _ A ,Q 









4 



.C. 64 


lis territory as the South, while the pol- 
ision was adhered to. But when the 
erritory was acquired, by running out 
% the South would have fared better, 
-■* i on jM'4rd of tV 




SKA AND KANSAS 


,rEE OH 

is .'' ' i! - op n ' - - 

MR. CLINGMAN, OF N. CAROLINA, 

K * ^ 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, APRIL 4, 1854. 

V 6 %. i "V 

4v * 1 


% 


The House being in "the Committee of the 
Whole on the state of the Union— • 


Mr. CLINGMAN said: 

Mr. Chairman: As no one has had the floor 
assigned to him, f will now occupy it with a view 
ot saying something upon a question which has 
been already discussed at great length during the 
present session of Congress. 

I have heretofore sought an opportunity to pre¬ 
sent to this House certain points connected with 
the Nebraska bill. It is probable that I shall find 
an hour little time enough for my purpose, and 
therefore I say to the gentlemen around me that I 
hope they will not interrupt me by askingpermis- 
sion to explain. I shall endeavor to do justice to 
every one, but should it be my misfortune to mis¬ 
represent any gentleman with whose opinions I 
may come in collision, I hope that he will avail 
himself of some other occasion to correct me. It 
has never been my misfortune, while I have occu¬ 
pied a seat upon this floor, to make a single re¬ 
mark that any gentleman in the House thought 
offensive to him, nor have I ever been called upon 
to explain anything I have said in the course of 
debate. My purpose will be to-day to keep within 
due parliamentary bounds, and at the same time 
frankly and fairly to discuss the questions con¬ 
nected with this subject, upon what I understand 
to be their true merits. 

You have been told by the gentleman from Vir¬ 
ginia [Mr. Millson] that I had something to say 
upon the Nebraska territorial bill in the last Con¬ 
gress, when it was pending, not in the shape, how- 
e ver, in which it is now presented. After a speech 
on it, I offered an amendment, to protect the rights 

the Indians, which was adopted, and I then 
voted for the bill. That amendment now stands 
in the present bill in the identical language in 
.which it was offered by me. The fact that more 
than two thirds of that Congress thought that a 
territorial organization was then necessary affords 
an additional reason, to my mind, why we should 
at once organize a Territory there. I voted for the 
bill then—not liking it, however, and after trying 
to get it in a better shape—because there was 
nothing offensive in the bill itself. I greatly pre¬ 
fer the proposition which has come from the Sen¬ 
ate. I could well support it as it is; but I shall 
vote, nevertheless, to strike out what is known as 
the Clayton amendment; not that I think it is 
wrong in theory, but because it will lead to no 
practical results, and was moved by an enemy of 
the bill merely to embarrass its friends in the 
North. As to the amendment of my colleague, 
enator Badger,] I do not think that it changes 
the character of the original bill in any manner 
whatsoever. Be that as it may, as the bill now 
stands, it provides, in the clearest terms, that the j 
people of that Territory shall not be prohibited, by [ 




any law formerly existing, from legislating as the 
Constitution of the United States permits them to 
do. It does not say that there shall be no law 
upon the subject of slavery. It merely says that 
it will not revive any former old law prohibiting 
or establishing it. In other words, that it will 
leave this Territory just as though there had never- 
been in it any law upon the subject of slavery. 

This, in my judgment, is the best species of 
non-intervention. We say that the people of the 
Territory may legislate as the Constitution of the 
United States permits them to do, without the 
intervention of Congressional law, French law, 
Spanish law, Mexican law, or Indian law. It 
makes the Territory like a sheet of blank paper, 
on which our citizens may write American consti¬ 
tutional law. It is, therefore, a better bill than 
the Utah and New Mexico bills of 1850; because 
those bills left the Mexican laws in force, by 
which slavery had been abolished and prohibited. 
It is a better bill than the Clayton compromise; 

I because that compromise left those Mexican laws 
: in force; and yet every southern Democrat in both 
! Houses of Congress, including Mr. Calhoun, sup- 
' ported that measure under the idea that the Con- 
| stitution of the United States, proprio vigor*, would 
override, annul, and supersede those local laws. 
If they were right in this view, why then the 
| more certainly would that Constitution be suffi- 
j cient where there was no opposing law whatever. 

I am satisfied that if the Clayton compromise an 
the acts of 1850 had contained a repeal of th 
Mexican law, there would have been no opposi 
tion to them from the South. I say, then, wit* 
the utmost confidence, that the Kansas and Ne¬ 
braska bills are, for the South, the best measure, 
yet presented. 

I shall not stop to answer this ingenious speed 
of the gentleman from Virginia, [Mr. Millson. 
or that of the gentleman from Maryland, [Mr 
Franklin.] The points argued by them wer 
very much discussed six or seven years ago, b>r 
those of us who were then in Congress. I wi 
only say that the real question to be met is this 
“ Shall this territory be left open to every citize 
of the United States, with the Constitution alone, 
to control him, or shall the Wilmot proviso stand 
on it?” That is the point which gentlemen have 
to meet. They have to show to their constituen¬ 
cies, that the Wilmot proviso, now standing upon 
and controlling the territory, is better than having 
it open to everybody, whether from the South or 
the North. I leave gentlemen to make the expla¬ 
nation to their constituents as they best can. 11 is 

enough for me to say that the arguments and ex¬ 
cuses given by them are not, in my opinion, of the 
smallest weight to justify opposition to the bill. 

. But, sir, before noticing what I regard as the 
principal difficulty in the way, let me advert to one 















other striking point. I know that in 1850 certain 
persons professed to be in favor of non-interven¬ 
tion who were really opposed to that principle. 
The true friends of the system—those who had sus¬ 
tained the doctrine of General Cass—are, I have 
no doubt, willing to carry it out to-day. But 
there were certain persons at that time entirely ad¬ 
verse to the principle in fact, but who, nevertheless, 
then gave it a hypocritical support, because they 
said that the settlement at that time, as proposed 
on non-intervention grounds, would operate inju¬ 
riously to the southern section. They saw that it let 
in the whole of Californiadown to the32d°‘ofnorth 
latitude as a free State, and that it threw the Santa 
Fe country out of Texas, a slave State, into New 
Mexico, a Territory where the Mexican law had 
abolished slavery, and, in the opinion of Mr. 
Webster, Mr. Clay, and many other prominent 
men, was still in full force, and sufficient to keep 
out slavery, and also that the people there were, 
as foreigners, understood to be hostile to the estab¬ 
lishment of slavery in any way. In short, that, 
as these prominent gentlemen said, the North got 
the territory practically, while we of the South 
got only the principle of non-intervention for the 
future. This principle, highly valuable in itself, 
they did not intend to apply to the organization of 
other Territories. The conduct of these persons 
shows that they did not, in good faith, intend to 
adopt the system as a general one. Hence, when 
afterwards this was declared to be a settlement in 
“principle and substance,” by Mr. Fillmore and 
the national convention, these persons only pre¬ 
tended to agree to the declaration. Their conduct 
now shows their insincerity, and the hollowness 
of their professions. 

But, Mr. Chairman, it is sometimes said by' 
gentlemen that this Missouri compromise was 
originally advantageous to the South, and that 
now, when it has ceased to be so, we want to get 
clear of it. Let us look at this statement for one 
moment. 

Missouri and Arkansas were admitted as slave 
States. Their extent was one hundred and sev¬ 
enteen thousand square miles. But, on the other 
hand, Iowa was admitted as a free State, and 
Minnesota was organized as a Territory, also with 
a restriction or prohibition of slavery. So also 
were Oregon and Washington. Now, sir, these 
three Territories and that State contain five hun¬ 
dred and thirty-four thousand square miles in their 
area—nearly five times as much as the States of 
Missouri and Arkansas. Remember, too, thatall 
this had originally been slave territory up to the 
date of the Missouri restriction. It appears, there¬ 
fore, that while this policyof division was enforced 
by the Missouri line, the northern section of the 
country acquired five times as much territory as 
the southern. Minnesota and Iowa alone have 
nearly twice the extent of the two slave States of 
Missouri and Arkansas, and Washington and Or¬ 
egon have three times as much more. It must also 
be borne in mind that Mr. Buchanan, as Secretary 
of State, claimed, in the controversy with Great 
Britain, the Oregon Territory as WQjl under the 
French and Spanish cessions as by the right of 
discovery. 

As to how our title to it really accrued is not, 
however, material; because, under the policy of 
division by the Missouri line, this whole territory 
was given up by the South without a struggle, be¬ 
cause it lay north of that line, and organized with 
the principle of restriction embodied in it. It thus 
will be seen that the North obtained five times as 


much of tl is territory as the South, while the pol¬ 
icy of division was adhered to. But when the 
Mexican territory was acquired, by running out 
this same line, the South, would have fared better, 
and gotten, in fact, more than wa&Vnvsd.o-f th/e ter¬ 
ritory. The northern members of Congress, how¬ 
ever, rejected the line, in spite of all our attempts 
to get it adopted. Many of the Democratic mem¬ 
bers did so because they were in favor of the prin- * 
cipleof non-intervention, as recommended by their 
candidate, General Cass; while the Whigs resisted 
it because they were Free-Soilers, and in favor of 
the Wilmot proviso. In the end they carried the 
day, and broke down the policy of division; and 
non-intervention was established. Shall this pol¬ 
icy noj^ be carried out for the future; or i3 it to be 
set aside, as the former one was, when it would 
have been favorable to the South? This is the 
first occasion since 1850 for a trial of the matter. 

As to the Territory of Washington, organized by 
the last Congress, the gentleman from Virginia 
[Mr. Millson] has overlooked unimportant fact. 
Washington was a part of the Oregon Territory; 
and the people there had, in their Territorial Legis¬ 
lature, passed a law prohibiting slavery. This was 
done before Congress applied the Wilmot proviso 
to it. Had we, therefore, during the last Con¬ 
gress, repealed their laws already established, this 
would have been a direct violation of the princi¬ 
ple on which the present measure rests, viz: the 
right of the people to regulate their own domestic 
matters. 

It appears, therefore, Mr. Chairman, that the 
Kanzas and Nebraska bills afford the first proper 
occasion for carrying out the new principles adopted 
in 1850. 

I come now, Mr. Chairman, to what I consider 
the great obstacle to the passage of the bill. The 
main opposition to it does not arise from any of 
the sources as yet alluded to, but it comes from 
another quarter and a force which has been fight¬ 
ing the question under false colors and in disguise; 
and I now propose to unmask the character of 
that opposition. It seems to be well understood 
that every member of the old Whig party upon 
this floor from the North is an opponent of the bill. 

I understand that those gentlemen are making ear¬ 
nest appeals to southern Whigs not to press this 
question on them, lest they should thereby break 
up the old Whig party. They are also deprecating 
agitation and insisting on quiet, &c. Those ap¬ 
peals are not made to me, Mr. Chairman, because 
for the last four or five years I have, for reasons 
which I will presently state, regarded myself as 
disconnected with that organization which these 
gentlemen control. In fact, I am rather out of all 
regular party organizations, and am regarded, I 
believe, as an independent. But, sir, to enable 
those members from the South who have less ex¬ 
perience than myself to understand the subject 
properly, and to know how much weight they 
ought to attach to such declarations and appeals, I 
wish to x’ecur to some things in the past, in no of¬ 
fensive spirit, but to make clear to every one the 
real principles upon which these gentlemen have — 
been and are still acting. 

In 184G the Wilmot proviso was brought for¬ 
ward; every Whig from the free States voted for 
it. It produced great excitement in the country, 
and came vefy near breaking up the party. They 
said, however, to southern Whigs, Do not be 
alarmed about this proviso; we only mean to use 
it to put a stop to the Mexican war, and prevent 
the conquest of Mexico; and also, to split in two 

















3 


the Democratic party in New York, and cripple 
them in Pennsylvania, in Wilmot’s district. I re¬ 
member how they used to put their arms around 
their southern friends in the kindest manner, and 
exclaimed, “ My God, do you suppose that we 
mean to push this thing, and drive you all offfrom 
us? Do not fear; we shall not press it to a practi¬ 
cal extreme.” After the war terminated, the first 
attempt to settle the question was by the Clayton 
compromise. That was'not entirely satisfactory 
to the South. But whether we should take it or 
not, depended upon the chance thereVas of getting 
abetter bill instead of it. The northern Whigs, 
however, in a body, assailed it in the fiercest man¬ 
ner. They said it was a cheat in itself; that it 
gave the South nothing practically, and was a mere 
scheme of the Democratic party to unite their 
forces and elect General Cass. It was said that if it 
assed he would be elected, General Taylor would 
e stricken down, and utterly repudiated by the 
North, under the fierce excitement which would 
be raised, and that, possibly, even the Free-Soilers 
would carry everything. I do not know that these 
declarations had any weight with those southern 
gentlemen who went against the bill. I doubt, in 
fact, if they did; but those who were here at that 
time know well the earnest appeals that were 
made to southern men, and the promises held out 
of a better settlement at a future time. 

The bill was defeated, and the election went, as 
everybody expected it would. By the division of 
the Democrats in the State of New York, Cass 
lost its vote, and in the Wilmot district in Penn¬ 
sylvania, and other places, there was defection 
enough to lose him that State; and General Tay¬ 
lor carried both those States, the loss of either of 
which would have been fatal to him. The North¬ 
ern Whigs had therefore triumphed upon their 
extreme anti-slavery policy. We had a right to 
expect, therefore, that they would at length be 
liberal towards us, and come to a fair adjustment 
of the pending issues. We met in December, after 
the presidential election, and, as a measure of con¬ 
ciliation and harmony, one of those gentlemen, 
Mr. Gott,ofNew York, introduced a bill,in most 
offensive language, to abolish the slave trade in the 
District of Columbia. All of those gentlemen voted 
for it, with the exception of Mr. Lincoln, of Illi¬ 
nois, only, I believe. They passed it by a heavy 
majority, with the aid of some Free-Soil Demo¬ 
crats. The southern members of both Houses of 
Congress thereupon held a meeting in the Senate 
Chamber. The northern Whigs, seeing the con¬ 
dition of things likely to be produced, and feeling 
some alarm, in that same soothing and conciliating 
manner for which they were distinguished, said 
that the vote on Gott’s resolution was a hasty and 
inconsiderate act, and that they would reconsider 
the resolution and reject it. They also said that 
the meetings which we were holding had been 
gotten up by General Foote, Mr. Calhoun, and 
other Democrats, with a covert design of breaking 
down General Taylor’s administration before it 
came into power, by exciting divisions between 
northern and southern Whigs, and that we ought 
to have more confidence in them than such a move¬ 
ment implied, and that all difficulties could be 
arranged amicably. These declarations had no 
weight with me, as I had determined not to give 
my cooperation further, except on just principles. 

It was seen, however, that there was no occa¬ 
sion for action at that time on the part of the 
southern members, and the excitement passed by. 

But, sir, the matter did not stop there. At that 


session many members of the Democratic party 
in the Senate being still anxious to settle the 
question, Mr. Walker, a Senator from Wiscon¬ 
sin, with great liberality and manliness, brought 
forward a proposition as an amendment to the 
civil and diplomatic bill, which would have set¬ 
tled the whole question fairly and on liberal terms. 
That proposition was adopted in the Senate, and 
came into this House, and was here supported by 
every southern member of both parties, and also 
by many liberal northern Democrats. It was as¬ 
certained that it was likely to pass, and thereupon 
the northern Whigs, who ought rather to have 
desired to get the matter settled so as to avoid em¬ 
barrassment to General Taylor’s incoming admin¬ 
istration, made the strongest opposition to it. 
They entered into a combination with the Free- 
Soilers and Abolitionists to defeat it; and when it 
was seen that we would probably carry it, they, 
as they then said and afterwards boasted, had 
agreed that rather than a majority should be al¬ 
lowed to pass it, they would call the yeas and 
nays until the end of the session, and thus defeat 
all the appropriation bills. In this way some who 
were in favor of it were frightened, and induced 
to give way, so that the measure was lost. 

Then, sir, during the year following they kept 
this question before the people at the North, and 
the result was that the Cass Democrats were 
beaten almost everywhere in that section of the 
country; and when we met at the commencement 
of the session of 1849-’50, it was ascertained that 
they had nearly ninety Whig members from the 
North, every man of whom was pledged to 
vote for the Wilmot proviso and for the abolition 
of slavery wherever Congress had jurisdiction, 
and particularly in the District of Columbia. I 
recollect very well that in our caucus upon a res¬ 
olution offered by Mr. Toombs, Mr. Brooks, of 
New York, said that he and his colleague, Mr. 
Briggs, had determined not to vote for the aboli¬ 
tion of slavery in the District of Columbia during 
the first session of that Congress. That was all 
we could get by way of concession from them. 
They would not vote for the abolition of slavery 
in the District of Columbia the first session, but 
they would make no such promise for the second 
session, and then stood ready to vote for the pro¬ 
viso. Several prominent gentlemen from Mas¬ 
sachusetts, Ohio, and other States, declared that 
the doctrine upon which they had been elected 
was that of hostility to slavery, and that they 
should vote for abolishing it wherever Congress 
had jurisdiction over the subject, and also to ex¬ 
clude it from all territory of the United States. 
To this doctrine there was no dissent from that 
section of the Union, though it was earnestly 
sought by southern Whigs in the hope that they 
might find some ground for united action as a 
party. 

Such was the condition of things at the begin¬ 
ning of that Congress. The country was in a 
state of extreme peril. The whole northern Whig 
party, in great force, and a number of Democrats, 
also upon the Free-Soil platfoi-m, were ready to 
act, and many of the Cass men—for by that name 
the non-intervention men were designated—were 
disposed to get out of the way, and let the bills 
pass, and then see what General Taylor would do 
with them. There was a large majority of the 
Congress thus pledged to push through these 
measures. 

I do not propose to take up the time of the 
committee with a rehearsal of the events of that 
















4 


memorable session of 1849-*50. The majority 
were pledged to a line of policy that they dared 
not then carry out; and I do not hesitate to say 
boldly, that if that policy had been carried out in 
practice, your Government would not exist to-day, 
and ought not to have lived an hour. 

They perceived what the effect was likely to be, 
and the remarkable condition of things was exhib¬ 
ited of men pledged to a certain course of conduct 
which they saw would be destructive, and who 
were begging others to keep the question out of the 
way, and save them from the effect of their own 
principles. General Taylor’s administration and 
Cabinet, it is well known, could not get along upon 
the principles that had brought them into power, 
and were obliged to fall back upon their do-noth¬ 
ing policy. Why, even at the close of that session, 
after there had been a change of the Administration 
—after Mr. Fillmore, who was favorable to a more 
liberal policy, came into power—after the admis¬ 
sion of California as a free Stdte, with the whole 
Pacific, for a thousand miles embraced in it—after 
the passage of that series of measures which Mr. 
Webster himself said, as to the territory gave the 
t .North everything, and to the South nothing but 
the fugitive slave law—out of more than eighty 
members we found only three northern Whigs to 
vote for that act, and of those three, only my friend 
from Ohio [Mr. Taylor] has been returned by his 
party. Even after the bill was passed there was an 
attempt to get up the cry of repeal under the lead 
of Senator Seward, and great agitation made all 
through the North, and a large majority of these 
men who had refused to vote for the law con¬ 
curred in the clamor; there was a fierce struggle— 
a struggle to catch the anti-slavery feeling there 
and acquire party strength. I may add, even after 
that, it is well known that in the selection of 
candidates for the Presidency they endeavored to 
throw out of the way, and set the seal of popular 
condemnation on Mr. Webster and Mr. Fillmore, 
because of their connection with these measures. 
These things have been well discussed, and are 
generally understood by the country. 

Why, sir, we forced them with extreme diffi¬ 
culty in the convention to come up and adopt a 
platform to carry out these measures. About half 
of the northern men voted against it, and a great 
many of the party organs denounced and repudi¬ 
ated the platform, and thereby, as was proven in 
the end, materially contributed to the overwhelm¬ 
ing defeat of the candidate. 

I have made this review, and stated these things, 
Mr. Chairman, to show that these Whig gentle¬ 
men from the North, as a party, have stood all 
the time on extreme anti-slavery ground; that they 
have all the while made efforts to acquire party 
strength by appealing to the anti-slavery feeling 
of the North, and to Abolition sympathies. Now, 
what would you expect of them On this question ? 
And what do you suppose they are going to do? 
Exactly what they have been doing for the last 
seven or eight years. These gentlemen are not 
opposing this measure because it interferes with 
the Missouri compromise. Why, there is notone 
of them, probably, who ever alluded to that com¬ 
promise, except in terms of denunciation, until 
the beginning of the present session. I might 
show you that the gentleman from Vermont [Mr. 
Meacham] who led off, some time since, against 
the Nebraska bill, in September, 1850, voted 
against the recognition of the Missouri line when 
moved by myself. I might have shown, and if I 
had obtained the floor when the gentleman took 


his seat I would have shown, that the State of 
Vermont has, through her representatives, repu¬ 
diated every single congressional compromise ever 
made; not only nullifying the fugitive slave law 
of 1850, as well as the act of 1793, but all pre¬ 
vious compromises. 

In 1833, when South Carolina had taken steps 
to nullify the revenue laws, Mr. Clay’s compro¬ 
mise bill was passed, bringing down the duties to 
twenty per centum. Afterwards, to strengthen the 
measure when the land distribution was passed, 
on motion of Senator Berrien, of Georgia, it was 
provided that this distribution should stop if the 
duties should be raised above twenty per centum; 
and yet this measure of compromise, thus fortified, 
was, against the vote of the whole South, both 
Whig and Democrat, repealed, and the land dis¬ 
tribution also stopped by the vote of the members 
from Vermont and other northern States. Why, 
sir, immediately after the passage of this very act 
of 1820, prohibiting slavery north of 36° 30', and 
providing for the admission of Missouri as a slave 
State, a resolution, in the strongest terms, was 
adopted by the Vermont Legislature, instructing 
their Representatives not to let Missouri into the 
Union unless she abolished slavery from within 
her limits. If it were a compromise act, as he 
alleged, then his own State violated it; and so did 
New York, and a number of other States; and so 
did a large majority of the northern members of 
Congress by refusing Missouri admission. No, 
sir; these gentlemen are now doing exactly what 
they have been doing for many years past, viz: 
affiliating with Free-Soilers and Abolitionists, and 
making a great effort to obtain party strength in 
the North by assailing the Democrats, who are- 
more liberal to us on these questions. 

Now, I do not desire to see this agitation kept 
up, for reasons which I will presently advert to; 
and I will submit the question to these gentlemen 
candidly, what have they gained by all this excite¬ 
ment, and all their denunciation of slavery? Of 
course they must have expected to lose the South. 
The wonder is that they have anybody there at 
all friendly to them. Thaf it is otherwise only 
shows great force of party ties and attachments. 
In my own State, originally one of the most de¬ 
cided Whig States in the Union, they have placed 
themselves in the minority. Kentucky has her 
twenty-five thousand majority brought down, I 
believe, to about nothing at all. Tennessee like¬ 
wise, and indeed the whole South, has been pretty’ 
mqch thrown against them. What did they gam 
in the North ? Ohio used to be a W hig State, and 
I believe, at thelast election, they werebeaten sixty 
thousand votes. They were beaten every where 
in the North during the late presidential canvass, 
except in Massachusetts and Vermont; and They 
were weaker there than they were ten yea eg 
when they began the agitation against slavery. 
They have been losing ground even at home, and 
why is it? I think I can tell you. It is because 
there is an equity in our claim to have a share of 
the benefits of this Government that has made our 
cause strong in spite of all their efforts. We are 
a part of the American citizens who constitute the 
people of the Union. We pay taxes to support 
the Government, and bear arms in time of war; 
and the attempt to exclude us from the benefit of 
the Government is so unjust, that they have been 
losing ground on that account. 

In spite of all the appeals to fanaticism and de¬ 
nunciation of us and our social system in New 
England, old men remember, and young ones have 












read, that^when George Washington went to Bos¬ 
ton, in 1775, to help drive the British out of the 
city, he was not repudiated because he was a 
slaveholder. New Yorkers know that in the light 
at Saratoga, which perhaps determined the result 
of the revolutionary struggle, Gates and Morgan 
were thought none the less worthy companions of 
the brave men of the North because they were 
slaveholders. In the late war, Harrison and Scott, 
of Virginia, and Forsyth, of North Carolina, and 
many others from the South, were on the bound¬ 
ary line with the patriotic men of the North, de¬ 
fending the national territory. No man ever had 
a stronger hold on the masses of the North than 
Andrew Jackson. Neither he nor his great rival, 
Henry Clay, ever stood before a northern au¬ 
dience, during the last ten years of their lives, 
without being welcomed with ashout of applause. j 
The very many brave and gallant men who went 
from the free States into the Mexican, war, will 
tell their neighbors that the southern regiments 
who were with them, in that country, on the day j 
of battle, stood by the American colors. They 
have, therefore, been constantly losing ground, 
while the national men have been gaining on them, 
in spite of their alliance with the fanaticism and 
sectional prejudices of the anti-slavery party. 
The issue is upon better footing to-day than it 
Iras ever before been placed upon, viz: the right 
of every community to regulate its own local mat¬ 
ters without the intervention of those having no 
direct interest in the questions. 

It has been well said that there is a great resem¬ 
blance between this issue and that involved in the 
struggle between the Colonies and Grfeat Britain 
at the Declaration of Independence. There is, 
however, one'greatand striking difference between 
the two cases. The Colonies in 1776 denied the 
right of Great Britain to tax them to the smallest 
extent; but the people of Kansas and Nebraska 
say to Congress, “ You may impose any amount 
of taxation upon us, and we will cheerfully pay 
it; you may make your own disposition of the 
public lands, lay off your militarj&roads and post 
roads, and establish your forts and arsenals; 
you may subject us to the action of every law of 
Congress that the citizens of anyone State in this 
Union is subject to; but when you have done all 
that, when you have exhausted all your powers 
under the Constitution of the United States, then 
we ask the poor privilege of managing our local 
affairs according to our own wishes.” And why 
should they not have it? Why should" Massa¬ 
chusetts or North Carolina control the people of 
those Territories? Sir, the question stands upon 
the great republican right of every community to 
legislate for itself. I know there are individuals 
wlio deny that right. If is impossible to conceal 
the fact that there is a large party—I do not know 
whether I ought to call it a party, or whether it is 
a mere fragment of a party—in this country who 
have denied that right, and who, in the bottom 
of their hearts, do not believe that the people are 
capable of self-government. It is the same feeling 
that prompted the old sedition act; it is the same 
feeling which has thrown the influence of certain 
men against all questions of popular right. Now, 
it is very hard for me to designate them. I do not 
know that I could properly call them the Anti-Sla¬ 
very party, for that would not be a very accurate 
designation; nor the Federal party, even though it 
might do well to combine the two names. Per¬ 
haps I might refer to one of their leading organs 
with advantage. 


The gentleman from Georgia, [Mr. Stephens)] 
I remember, commented upon the course of the 
National Intelligencer. Now, I think that journal 
is a faithful exponent of the party I allude to. Its 
regard for the Missouri compromise has been as¬ 
sumed only for the present occasion. I remember 
| very well that during the struggle, up to 1850, that 
paper never came out for this Missouri line, al¬ 
though the South was battling for it for years; nor 
did it once assert our right to occupy the Territory 
in common with the people of the North, clear and 
indisputable as thatright was. Its whole weightand 
influence were covertly but adroitly thrown against 
us, and on the anti-slavery side. I never attributed 
this course to any love of liberty on the part of 
the conductors of that paper. On the contrary, 
in every struggle between liberty and despotism, it 
takes the side of despotism; in every contest be¬ 
tween the United States and any foreign country, 
it takes ground against the United States. It would 
be marvelous if our Government were, in fact, 

| always wrong on every issue with a foreign nation. 
I presume, therefore, that it is because ours is the 
| freest Government upon earth that this journal 
always is found taking sides against it, and for 
our enemies. As to our internal policy, it is the 
faithful organ of that party which has labored 
industriously, as you and I well know, sir, to de¬ 
stroy all the limitations of the Federal Constitution, 
and substitute an absolute central Government in 
its stead. These people have taken their opinions 
mainly from the Tory press and the Tory party 
of England; and those opinions happen to be anti¬ 
slavery as well as anti-republican. They seem 
to desire no higher honor than to have the priv¬ 
ilege of adopting and defending everything which 
comes from these sources. If any gentleman will 
take the trouble to examine some of the British 
anti-slavery journals, he will see the whole pro¬ 
gramme of our abolition countrymen laid down 
there. They praise and defend the British policy 
in all things. A few years ago, for example, 
Great Britain voted $100,000,000 to liberate her 
negroes in Jamaica, and convert them into sav¬ 
ages; and’since that event two millions of her 
white people at home have perished miserably 
by famine. It is demonstrable that if that sum 
had been applied properly at home, every one of 
these unfortunate Irish men, women, and chil¬ 
dren might have been saved. Even if she would 
devote the millions which are now expended an¬ 
nually for the benefit of the negroes in Africa, 
she would save the lives of her own white people. 
Still her policy in all things is defended by her 
allies here. 

’Great Britain is a very sagacious Power, and 
not less selfish than sagacious. She knows well 
that in the future she has more to dread from the 
United States than from any other nation. She 
knows that our people are contesting with her now 
wherever the sea rolls, and wherever mind comes 
in contact with mind. But she is too cautious 
and far-sighted to assail us on a point where we 
are united. Hence she attacks us upon matters 
connected with slavery, and straightway you see 
the Abolition party, headed by such leaders as the 
gentleman from Ohio, [Mr. Giddings,] at once 
arising in her behalf, and making a terrific clamor 
throughout the land, and distracting the public 
mind and diverting it from the real issue. And 
you see that larger anti-slavery party, of which the 
Intelligencer is an organ, at once likewise taking 
sides with her upon all such questions. Even 
though they do not succeed in effecting anything 


*4 






















6 


* 


practically in the.way of the abolition of slavery, 
or in bringing about a collision between different 
sections of the country, yet they do a great deal 
for her, our rival. They keep us in an eternal agi¬ 
tation about this question of slavery to the neglect 
of great national interests. We do not put our 
public defenses in a proper condition; we fail to 
protect sufficiently the rights of our citizens abroad, 
whether in the fisheries of the Northeast, in Central 
America, in Cuba, or elsewhere; and therefore, I 
say, it is a wise as well as selfish policy on the part 
of Great Britain to keep us embroiled in such dif¬ 
ficulties and discussions, so that her anti-slavery 
allies here, who are very faithful to her, can assist 
her in carrying out her policy. 

I desire, sir, that this question of the organiza¬ 
tion of the Territory of Nebraska shall be treated 
as a great American question, with no foreign in¬ 
fluence brought to bear upon it. It will be found, 
I think, that I have done no injustice to any one 
in the course of remark in which I have indulged. 
Whoever is familiar with the political records of 
Congress and the country, which I have merely 
glanced at, will find my conclusions right. At any 
rate, I am confident that I shall be able to defend 
and maintain every single allegation made. In¬ 
stead of meeting the Nebraska question on its 
merits, its opponents are heaping a great deal of 
denunciation on the friends of this bill, especially 
Senator Douglas and President Pierce. A great 
flood of calumny has been opened upon Judge 
Douglas especially. The manner in which it has 
been manifested at certain points in the North is 
equally malicious, contemptible, cowardly, and 
mean; and not less futile and harmless, than con¬ 
temptible and mean. Neither the statesman of 
the Granite State, nor the young champion of the 
western Democracy, will ever be harmed by these 
assaults. He who is most thoroughly identified 
with this great popular American principle will be 
borne with it onward and upward in its career of 
triumph. In the discussion of this question I have 
been particularly struck by one fact, and that is, 
the unwillingness of the opponents of the measure 
to meet the issue fairly. And hence they are fall¬ 
ing back on the opinions of our ancestors of 1775 
and 1776 upon the question of slavery. They 
seem anxious to get rid of the light of the nine¬ 
teenth century, and fall back upon the opinions of 
a former age, and of the men who lived when the 
Government began its existence. 

Now, sir, it is universally admitted that the 
Constitution of the Clnited States itself has noth¬ 
ing in it to support these anti-slavery views; on 
the contrary, every single provision in that instru¬ 
ment is pro-slavery—that is, for the protection, 
and defense, and increase of slavery. For exam¬ 
ple, one of them is that provision by which the 
slave trade was extended for twenty years, by 
which the Constitution expressly forbade Con¬ 
gress to put a stop to the trade for that period, and 
under which provision most of the negroes were 
brought into this country. That feature, it is well 
known, was adopted by the entire New England 
vote, in convention, with the aid of South Carolina 
and Georgia, against the other southern and mid¬ 
dle States. 

But, Mr. Chairman, I admit that there are 
many opinions against slavery expressed by indi¬ 
viduals, such as Jefferson and others, as private 
persons, and which have been referred to in the 
discussion of this question. No man has more 
respect than I have for the opinions of the great 
men of that day on all subjects in which they were 


fully enlightened as to facts. I hold their author¬ 
ity on such questions as entitled to the greatest 
weight. But no man will pretend that the world 
has not made a prodigious advance in knowledge 
since their time. No sensible or enlightened man 
would go back to Benjamin Franklin, philosopher 
j as he was, for information on scientific subjects, 
or adopt his views as to mechanics, electrical, or 
steam machinery, in preference to many men of our 
day. But among all the great advances that have 
been made in human science—whether you take 
geology, ohemistry, or any other branch of knowl¬ 
edge—the greatest advance, perhaps, of all has 
been made in the science of Government, and of 
the difference of the races of men and their adap¬ 
tation to different social institutions. In the last 
century, sir, many of the leading men of the coun¬ 
try looked, no doubt, upon the negro as in every 
respect like a white man, except that, by some 
strange freak of nature, the former had a black 
skin. That idea no longer prevails. The whole 
doctrine of negro equality with white men has 
been exploded in our day, not merely in the South, 
but throughout the United States. 

The people of Indiana and of Illinois have re¬ 
cently—and that, too, by an inqmense majority— 
decided against that equality; and have forbidden 
any negro to enter into those States. In the State 
of Connecticut, too, when the proposition to en¬ 
able negroes to vote was submitted to the people 
of that State a few years ago, the question was 
decided by a vote of nearly four to one against the 
negro; and they were refused the privilege of 
voting, merely because they were negroes. New 
York has recently done the same thing. In fact, 
there is not a single free State, where the issue 
has been directly made on the question of negro 
equality, that the mass of the people have not de¬ 
cided against it; nor can it be made without the 
same result. 

I happened, Mr. Chairman, to be in Connecti¬ 
cut when this vote was taken. I found that most 
of the newspapers seemed to be on the side of the 
negroes, and many of the literary men of the 
State, and they anticipated a triumph; but when 
the votes of the people came to be counted, the 
result was altogether the other way. Why, Mr. 
Chairman, if all the literary men on the earth 
were to argue that the rays of the sun were the 
cause of darkness and cold, they never could con¬ 
vince people who walk in this glorious sunshine 
that their theory was correct. They might per¬ 
suade those who live down in the bowels of the 
earth—those who work in the coal mines of Great 
Britain all their lives. So, too, these Abolitionists 
may convince the people of England of the equality 
of the negro to the white man, because they do 
i not see the negro, and, in fact, know nothing 
about him; but our Americans, who have seen the 
specimens, cannot be thus humbugged. 

I say, sir, that the idea of negro equality no 
longer exists in the United States as a fact. I 
! care nothing about theories, nor how this difference 
is accounted for. Some of our Abolition brethren, 
being soft-headed, and easily deluded on all sub¬ 
jects, for example, say that the negro is different 
from the white man because of the effect of climate, 
manner of life, and want of opportunity to become 
civilized, &c. All history and fact is at war with 
these ideas. The negro has been placed by Provi¬ 
dence in that country and climate most favorable 
to his health and well-being; and his opportunities 
j for acquiring the advantages of early civilization 
I were vastly greater than those of the northern bar- 


















7 


barians, from whom we have ourselves descended. 
They were, more than four thousand years ago, in 
contact with the Egyptians, the most enlightened 
nation of antiquity. Afterwards the Carthagen- 
ians, a highly intelligent Phoenician colony of white 
men, the first people of their day, overran all 
Northern Africa, and brought some of the negro 
races into subjection. Then came the great Ro¬ 
man Empire, which civilized everything else it 
touched, but made no impression upon the ne¬ 
groes. The Saracens, too, the first people of the 
middle ages who gave light to the Western Eu¬ 
ropean nations, and who extended their conquests 
south of the Great Desert, left the negroes where 
they found them—savages. 

A second class of inquirers as to the cause of 
the difference between negroes and white men 
take a Biblical view of the question, and suppose 
that, inasmuch as the defendants of one man 
were, by a judgment of the Almighty, sentenced 
to be slaves forever, it is but reasonable and natural! 
that there should be distinguishing outward marks 
in their organization. 

The third class, embracing almost all the great 
men of science, hold that the negro race is spe¬ 
cifically different from the white race. I care not 
what view gentlemen take, but the fact may be 
assumed as settled in the American mind, that 
there is a material difference between the negro and 
the white man. As Canning said, facts are stub¬ 
born things. There is a higher law, but it is the 
law of nature. When God Almighty implants 
his characteristics upon natural objects, man can¬ 
not change them.. If a political ^system is in 
accordance with those natural laws, it will be suc¬ 
cessful. The American Constitution has been 
well framed in accordance with those principles. 
But, on the other hand, in Mexico and Jamaica, 
and in other places, where they have undertaken 
to upset the law of Providence, and to establish 
the doctrine of negro equality, nothing but mis¬ 
chief has been produced. 

Since the time of our revolutionary fathers, these 
great discussions, supported by innumerable facts, 
have shaken the human mind to -its center, and 
brought it to a conclusion of which they did not 
dream. Hence their opinions are v/orth very little 
in this debate. Let no man, Mr. Chairman, sup¬ 
pose such topics as I am no w discussing are abstrac¬ 
tions, having no real weight. These considera¬ 
tions, more or less, are constantly acting on the 
minds of men, and, in fact, are daily referred to 
by the opponents of the measure under examina¬ 
tion. In another point of view, too, there has 
been a great change of opinion during the present 
age. I speak with reference to the profitableness 
of slave labor, and the prosperity of slaveholding 
countries. 

The free States have fifty-four majority upon 
this floor. Under the old apportionment they had 
fifty-one, a gain of three members over the South 
in ten years. Sir, during that time there have 
been about two millions of foreigners added to the 
population of this country by immigration, and 
nearly every one of these persons have settled in 
the free States. If, therefore, their increase by 
natural means had been proportionate to that of 
the South, they ought to have made a gain of some 
twenty members instead of three, especially when 
the admission of California is considered. 

I refer to this matter to show that our popula¬ 
tion has increased more rapidly than even that of 
the free States, great and prosperous as they are. 
That population, also, is a productive one. We 


make abundant provision for ourselves as respects 
agricultural products generally, and are able to 
send a large amount of grain, &c., out of our ter¬ 
ritory, both to the North and to foreigners. In 
addition to all this, our production of cotton in 
some years amounts to nearly $150,000,000 worth; 
the sugar and molasses to nearly $20,000,000; and 
the tobacco, rice, &c., to a large amount. We 
j thus furnish two thirds of the exports to foreign 
countries, giving thereby employment to the im¬ 
mense shipping interest of the Union, and ena¬ 
bling our tonnage already to equal that of Great 
Britain. Do not these facts prove that our system 
of industry is one that is eminently productive? 

Gentlemen may tell me that one cannot get as 
much work out of a slave as a free man would 
perform. I grant it. But they forget that among 
a free population a large proportion are non-pro¬ 
ducers all their lives, and that even the working 
classes are unemployed a great part of their time; 
and the young persons of both sexes are usually 
unemployed, and, in fact, an expense, until they 
attain maturity. On the contrary, the negroes 
are almost all kept constantly at work in some 
way, and the consequence is, that these three mil¬ 
lions of slaves actually produce more, probably, 
than the same number of free persons in any 
other section of the country. I do not mention 
these things to claim superiority for the South 
over the North, but merely to establish the equal¬ 
ity of my section. You will find, too, that we 
have just as many churches as the free States 
have, and fewer paupers and criminals than any 
country upon earth perhaps can show. These 
things are stated to prove that our system is a 
prosperous one, and that there is no reason why 

I this Government should be arrayed against it. I 
point to the fact, also, that the negroes are, 

II whether considered physically, intellectually, so- 
: cially, or morally, superior to any other portion 
Ij of their race upon the globe, whether in a state 

| of freedom or slavery. 

These are views of which little or nothing was 
known fifty years ago; but they are taking deep 
hold upon the public mind now, and statesmen 
and wise men will look at things as they are, and 
ponder well before they act in opposition to the 
evidences of their senses and their reason. The 
ways of Providence are wiser than the imagina¬ 
tions of men, and let us therefore follow where the 
facts seem to point. No man knows as yet what 
we shall be led to; but the opinion of the country 
is very different now from what it was fifty years 
ago; and what it will be a century hence, can any 
man assume to say? No, sir; but the wise man 
will be disposed to let these things alone; he will 
rather permit these matters work their own way 
in due time. Under the influence of excited feel¬ 
ings, and in pursuit of a single idea, men are some- 
i times carried to great extremes. For example, 
many of the northern people insist that slavery 
must not be extended, but that it must be con¬ 
fined to its present limits. It will thus happen, 
j say they, that after a time, for want of room, the 
I slave population will no longer inci'ease; and per- 
j haps the low price of labor, and the want of 
means of subsistence, will induce the owners to 
liberate their slaves. They say that the condition 
of the present slave States will be like that of por¬ 
tions of Europe, where the population cannot in¬ 
crease, and where a bare subsistence can be afforded 
to the«people in ordinary years, so that in a scarce 
year large numbers are swept away by famine. 
In this way, they argue the increase of slaves could 

























be prevented. A not less effectual mode, however, 
would be to put to death the infant negroes from 
time to time. This, too, would be more humane, proba¬ 
bly, than the other process, as the amount of general misery 
produced by a condition of things similar to that in Ireland 
during the years of famine, would doubtless greatly exceed 
that caused by the mode suggested. Intelligent men at the 
North of course know that the southern States would not 
consent to submit to such a line of policy, and that the at¬ 
tempt to enforce it will merely overthrow the Government. 
In fact, the amount of property now held in slaves, and the 
interests connected with it are strong enough to protect 
themselves. In France, and other European countries, the 
strongest political systems that men could inventhave been 
overthrown, from time to time, but the rights of property 
have withstood all the shocks of revolutions. So the interests 
which the South has will be strong enough to protect them¬ 
selves—always, I hope, in the Union, but certainly out of 
it, should it ever become necessary. These considerations 
need not, however, enter largely into the present discus¬ 
sion. We stand on our constitutional rights, and the jus¬ 
tice, both political and moral, of the proposition that every 
community ought to be allowed to regulate its own domestic 
matters. Adopt this cardinal line of policy, and the coun¬ 
try will no more be disturbed With agitations about slavery. 

Mr. Chairman, there was considerable excitement pro¬ 
duced in the House yesterday by a resolution which the 
gentleman from Ohio [Mr. Campbell] offered in reference 
to the annexation of Canada. This movement will enable 
us to illustrate the practical effect of the pending measure. 
If the old system of bringing the powers of the Government 
into collision with the rights of the (South, by restricting 
slavery, is to prevail, as Canada would strengthen the north¬ 
ern movement against us, we should be opposed to its an¬ 
nexation. But suppose we adopt the opposite line of policy, 
and settle down upon the doctrine that every community 
shall regulate its own local and domestic affairs. Why, sir, 
the proposition for the annexation of Canada would be 
looked upon simply as a national question, as one in which 
the North and South were equally interested, and the ad¬ 
vantages and disadvantages of the measures would be fairly 
considered by both sections. I am not by any means pre 
pared to say that the time will not come when Canada, as 
well as many other provinces, will be annexed to the United 
States. I agree with the gentleman from Virginia, [Mr. 
Millson,] that there is danger of too rapid expansion of 
our territory. I believe in the law of progress, but there may 
be such a thing as too high a rate of speed for safety. I ad 
rnit all this, but must tell him that it is idle to attempt to 
prevent a forward movement. He might just as well strive 
to dam up the waters of that Niagara io which he alluded 
as prevent the expansion of our Republic. We must act 
wisely, however, and place ourselves in a condition to be 
benefited and not injured by these coming acquisitions of 
territory. 

What ought we to do? Allow every portion of the coun¬ 
try to regulate its own affairs, whether States or Territories, 
and turn our attention to those great national questions 
upon which the interests of the country demand our action. 
But, in justice to myself, I perhaps ought to say that while 
I would not hurry expansion of territory, yet neither am I 
prepared to say that the infant does not now live who may 
see all the country between Cap.e Horn and the Polar ocean 
of the. north united in one empire. I do not say that it will 
be so, nor am I prepared to say to what extent this confed¬ 
eration of Republics may be carried. We are in the midst 
of the grandest experiment humanity has ever seen ; and if 
we do our part wisely, ( have no doubt but that, under the 
favor of Providence, a fortunate result, will be attained. 

I have witnessed, Mr. Chairman, several of these anti- 
slavery excitements, and I have observed that when they 
are first gotten up their power seems to be the greatest. The 
Abolitionists are well organized ; they throw out their pub¬ 
lications all over the country at once, without being over- 
scrupulous as to the truth and justice of their statements; 
and hence tlvy hurry away the minds of the community for 
a season. Truth cannot travel as fast as falsehood, but in 
the end always overtakes her\ Hence, after a full discus¬ 
sion and a fair understanding of the subject, the excite¬ 
ment is shorn ofits strength, and dies out before the intelli¬ 
gence of the people. For example, when the question of 
the annexation of Texas first came up, the cry was raised 
that the whole North was dead against it, and that any 
who advocated it would be instantly crushed. Even after 
the matter had been adopted by the Democratic party in its 
convention in Baltimore on Mr. Polk's nomination, and 
even as late as September, the convention in New York 
which nominated Silas Wright for Governor, passed a res¬ 
olution against the annexation of Texas, though agreeing to 
support Mr. Polk nevertheless; and, in fact, when Congress 
met, even after the election, there was great opposition 


among Democratic members, but ultimately the body oi 
these gentlemen, with the aid of some few southern W lugs, 
came up and passed it. I have yet to learn that a single one 
ofthem was beaten on that ground. I remember, also, when 
the Wilmot proviso was first brought forward, there were 
only six or seven gentlemen North who voted 

against it. We were told to take Mr last look of those gen- 
I tlernen ; that they went home to their political graves. Such 
was the language used then ; but oneofthe preachers who 
pronounced their funeral sermon on more than ofm occasion 
was left at home himself; while the opponents oi the Wil¬ 
mot proviso came up here thicker than ever. In a little 
while that proviso found none so poor as to do it reverence. 

When the fugitive slave law passed I was told by gen¬ 
tlemen who were favorable to it that it was producing an 
intensity of feeling in the North of which we could have no 
idea, they said that the whole North was against it; and 
in the South many were alarmed at the agitation, and some 
of thq*States passed resolutions in the strongest terms tor 
the enforcement of the law. I do not know that anybody 
has been defeated because of that bill in the North where a 
fight was firmly made on the issue. IIow will it be on this 
I occasion ? Some gentlemen will go forward and tell their 
i constituents that a great wrong has beam done to the Nprth. 

I What is it ? Why, that Congress has actually had the un- 
! paralleled—I will not say impudence, but want of justice— 
to allow the people of Kansas and Nebraska to legislate for 
themselves in local matters. Now, Mr. Chairman, do you 
think that it will produce any excitement when the ques¬ 
tion is understood ? Not a bit of it. When the idea is first 
thrown out that we are repealing the Missouri compromise 
to let slavery into that Territory, there will be the greatest 
excitement; but as the question conies to be canvassed 
and examined from time to time, the result will be that the 
issue will take a hold on the popular mind which none can 
jj resist. 

I have never in my life been afraid, when I felt that I was 
! right., to make an issue and debate a question before the 
people. I recollect very well that some years ago I was 
the only man from the South who voted for the reception 
of abolition petitions, and against the twenty-first rule. 

! There was a very intense excitement in my part of the 
! country against their reception; but when 1 came to discuss 
, and examine the question, 1 was fully sustained by the 

I people. 

j And here let me say that I do not deprecate debate on the 
[ subject of slavery. On the contrary, my own opinion is 
| that a calm, temperate discussion of all these questions in 
j Congress is positively beneficial. When I catne here, tOt 

II years ago, it was the fashion for southern men to say that 
!i “ you cannot venture to discuss slavery. It must not be 
I talked about in Congress.” The consequence was, the 
j Abolitionists were rampant when they saw that we seemed 

j to be afraid of them, and they pressed upon us, getting 
| stronger and stronger ali the time as we appeared to retreat 
and quail before them. The most cowardly cur, if you run 
from him, will follow and bite you. I took at once a differ¬ 
ent view, and was disposed to meet the question; taking 
the ground calmly then that we had better confront our ene¬ 
mies face to face. The great discussion which has since 
occurred, I am quite confident, has strengthened our posi¬ 
tion all through the North. Liberal men in that section 
now find less difficulty in sustaining themselves. The 
i northern and the southern people agree better and better as 
j they come to understand each other’s views. 

There is a great amount of common sense and good feel¬ 
ing among our people everywhere; and the discussion, sir, 
of all these questions has been productive of nothing but 
benefit. Remember that we cannot prevent the Abolition¬ 
ists debating these things. They will go all through the 
North, and spread their pamphletsfar and near. They will 
have their preachers and lecturers. I have had a great 
many sermons sent to me lately. They have two striking 
qualities—rhetoric and ignorance; and the very fact that* 
so many of these northern preachers—T mean Abolition 
preachers—have neglected their holy calling to embark in 
politics, is probably the reason why infidelity is making 
such a great headway among the Abolitionists. I am very 
sorry to see it. [Laughter.] I think that it would be bet¬ 
ter for them to discuss religion. Unless they cease we shall 
he compelled to send missionaries among them. [Laughter. J 
I read many of their papers, and, in common with the rest 
of the community, am shocked with witnessing their infiV 
! delity and blasphemy. They will eternally keep up this 
discussion about slavery. Then why not let it he calmly 
and temperately debated, since it is necessarily before us 
in connection with this bill, and will be brought up occa¬ 
sionally by kindred topics ? 

As my time has expired, I omit some points that I had 
intended to discuss, and I shall now take my seat, thank¬ 
ing the committee for the attention with which they have 
heard me. 






























































































/ .... V •-'\d *-•* ^ ^ 

C.* . \ll/ 'V^^V*’ vltv* 

A 0° .'^**. °o jd 4 .• ,0^ c*L»«, **o_ V> V ,.>'• 

» V6 ' ^n^WIHL^ \N * JF/T/yyb ** 3 ^ v VjeSSaVw*- O ±<*rjr77-. 



<?■ *•<’•' a°' >.'*»t.°‘ 4 # -r vrr,*’ ^o v ** 

" ^ ' % ^Hj| V ^fe ^ r % 

°° *'**&£■’ \r c °^ .‘J^l-\> ,o* ••!•' 





r oV 8 


:- ^o< •< 


0 - - '♦.To 5- d 4 " °o v—-.* o-- ^ -; 

1 ^ ^d'' 0 *. 0 * *9 .*••% v* 

*•>«!** : J 8 e. : ,/% ifB^' -igs^ >>•%, 

**••*• „/ ., \ <. *'?.v y \ -jss?*v < 

>5 , 0 <%^5trO ° SjxhTZzL'' % G° °o ♦ « t AN 




■v o' 
^d* 



° ^ °^ 

—'\#> %.‘*;v 

V * - V- <5fc 

«. >. c< 






^o* 


■* ’’bv* 


d* C ‘V‘■‘..i*’*^.° '» 0 T?°‘ 

► • _ * o„ *c\ .<y^ t * - V\ 0 " 0 * v 


vJ' *: 
*bV* 


v\o 4 °^ v 


«2* *#.■»• ^ 






W b^P - * 0 °WW: 

"/Wv' ‘ ‘oo^ 0 .a* -X\*'° • ‘ '/t..., 

iV . ~p- V ^l \\!//y^ZP * •*£> 4 4 ^N\\?r*W ^ a i 7.7 "7" v» * 


^ * 
V'V * 

<M/> 


^ /V 




A 


\s- 


*- 'W 


^-0, 


,0 ^ 


v^ * 


S, ■•• " /' ... . % '--•' ♦«* \ W- a' ” 

■%. C° °o .,# ,• VU,*, ^ ,0^ c«V- ^o .^ V ..... 


*&+ *t* 

4 F . . ^ # * •. - A u ^ * o w O - -A 

v r .♦!*»-> c> <0 V *»V% ^ -V 


* -W 

/ °- 
d r 


s fd' ^ 

* <L^ 0_ ^ _ 

. „ °*u **•' 

. , v r f ^ • ®- C\ 

^ ^ ♦ccCvVa* 0 ^ J 

.^•/C > « f\vvv2S\/ZrJ- o vP /-7 






*w 


5<b 


V s " °j. •’Tr.*’ A o- 

• "k'J'-^f, -d >’*,!'. ’’> "" v >w ,»*.. ■'o 

t* j/A gg /u ^ ^ c^* t ^ ^ ^ k ft ^ 

• ^ipifliys. ^ «*^fWV^fv/^I°o Deacidified using the Bookkeeper process j 

- * Neutralizing agent: Magnesium Oxide 

.y> ^ ■* o Treatment Date: May 2010 


*■>..,' A * .„,,* (p a' PreservationTechnologies I 

,.Cr a 0 " 9 * <3 dr A WORLD LEADER IN COLLECTIONS PRESERVATION 


°o 4 


%, c 


.-V 


111 Thomson Park Drive 


Cranberry Township, PA 16066 




3 > • 

”’OS^r,° ,V ■<• 

... V * 0 - ‘ % 

*♦ ^ v i*’* 0 - o. 

4 <L V ci> * * 

»** *G* & 

O'" t 0 " 9 <* r o <& . i»i <J* 

C *,^tv^<\ s* sLmJ* «P 





- ^ 

* *P> $ 

* 0* 

o ^5 *-^ 

vL. % {A * 

r£* ^ 'N^sH * *JL* O ** ” \ 

A w *TT* • 

a0 T **’*% \> * » * o„ ^rv 

-* »yw^« v, av ♦/CCsrA , 0 /> 

•* V * f^\v2^v/>7L o (C.? 

* C~> ^r, * 


^ 0^ 






* ^ 

% •>.'• ^0° '* 

• 0 # £S 

° ^<£' r AF * ^ 






i^/yvw/^ -sk* y% i: nws /\ 

••'‘V ..... V -‘ 0 * 6 ..... V ”‘> -* ^ *"** o«° -. * 

.J* /jfifi^* X 0 /^w. o > s'*mk. X , c .‘kssfoi:. 


* %$* A v 


O 

^ *" ’ * A' 

c\ .er ,♦;•», *> 

* X <# .VOCV. <#> 


.V 

N* *• 

: ^o ^ : 

; i.° % ,. 

♦ r\ &+. * Vmiv ~ 

* <%V d> * 

* © » o 9 





VA 






*. w 


^ '«• °° *7^-.' (0 <#•. ' 

••',■> v % ,*•• 

^ A. » 

•_ r$- A v * f 

*s z°, S" ®^CSI^t V\ 

r . aV^> * c^^rv 



• V 


, s ^ : 

^ 4*; • 

4 ^ 



> 4 . ^ y i 

% *'•-• ^° 

a 0 ft * .,«-/ ♦ y^ V * 

- tjv cV ^ A /. 


\.4> 


.0 V o° w<, y 



V,' * .T« *' ^ °o 
v v •'-••- > J 

r* ^ >4 

, ^xx^x/zx/ o V. 


$ A 

^ ' * • ’ /lV 

. °o y'^ \ c . 

.' >, 0 ‘•.wk’» <5 \' / SMf!$’ 5>° ■’*■ *,. 

'•'■“'V T) 'T ,.’* .o° ^ 

.0* *>• '^> ’ *' ^ ,;*•. *V *' .0^ .> 

** ^ 4V,r 0 V/ ^ 


^ ^c/JIPS P * ^ 

^ **"'<£* - ^ 
♦ o . o .0 ^ 


* 'V 

. 1 ,/ ^ 
f.0' .‘i^% 

•• V*^°' s^‘ 

* • o. "c> A -0 »*!,L% > v * t9 °* ^ «' 

y. ' » . fJL 5i . <* A A. * • V. xv 










LIBRARY OF CONGRESS 




































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































